Genetic testing is often heralded as a cornerstone in an imminent and exciting new age of personalized medicine, in which our health care is customized based on our individual genetic profiles. But too often progress has lagged while persistent medical, ethical, and scientific issues associated with genetic testing abound.

Last week we witnessed a major step toward reining in what has, until last year, been a veritable Wild West of genetic testing. On Monday, a U.S. District Court judge in Utah decided that Myriad Genetics could not stop a competitor, Ambry Genetics, from offering commercial BRCA testing as their current legal suit about "breast cancer testing" winds through the courts. (Full disclosure: Breast Cancer Action filed an amicus brief in opposition to Myriad's request for an injunction.)

Many people rightly wonder how Myriad can sue other companies for patent infringement after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in June 2013 that patents on human genes are illegal, thus ending Myriad's long-standing monopoly on the BRCA genes. The short answer is that Myriad's ultimate goal may be less about winning these latest lawsuits and more about the lawsuits to stall the financial implications of the Supreme Court's ruling - allowing them to hold onto their monopoly for as long as possible.

This week's ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby makes perfectly clear all that is at stake for Myriad: "Although plaintiffs (Myriad Genetics) have shown that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm through erosion of their test pricing structure, loss of their share of the testing market, and loss of their exclusive patent terms if an injunction does not issue ... plaintiffs are unable to establish that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims." In other words, Myriad's earnings will undoubtedly take a serious hit from increased competition, but this fact cannot override the dubious merit of their legal claims.

Shelby's ruling is part of a trend emerging to rein in the power of companies to control the terms of genetic testing. Not only have the courts pushed back on Myriad's monopoly, at the end of 2013 the Food and Drug Administration moved to stop the direct-to-consumer genetic testing company 23&Me from marketing and selling its DNA testing service without approval.

We must balance the desire for innovative treatments with our demands for safety and efficacy. As more labs and companies enter the BRCA testing market, we must ensure that these tests are validated and regulated to protect public health and patient interest. All genetic testing should be accompanied by professional genetic counseling. And genetic testing labs should join the scientific and medical community and appropriately share biological data through open-access databases.

As our scientific and medical communities forge ahead, we should always insist that all genetic testing companies uphold the highest, patient-centered scientific and ethical standards.

Karuna Jaggar is executive director of Breast Cancer Action in San Francisco.